Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community
Topic

common ancestry

Common ancestry: If the Khan Academy must front Darwinism, why use such unconvincing arguments?

Because of widespread convergent evolution, claims about common ancestry can’t be based on similarity of form alone — any more than we can assume that two people who look quite similar (body doubles) must be closely related. Life is more complex than that. Read More ›

Why frogs have such weird skulls

Food for thought: "Weirdly, it's easier for us to generate beautiful images of skulls than it is to know what these frogs eat," Blackburn said. "Natural history remains quite hard. Just because we know things exist doesn't mean we know anything about them." Read More ›

Biologist Wayne Rossiter on non-religious doubts about universal common ancestry

Wayne Rossiter, author of Shadow of Oz: Theistic Evolution and the Absent God, talks about predictable claims from theistic evolution: To catch people up to speed, in a facebook conversation, [Jim] Stump made the statements, “Common ancestry [here he means Universal Common Ancestry] is a multiply confirmed theory that explains the observable data in detail. So asking what kind of evidence would contradict that is about like asking what kind of evidence would it take for you to accept geocentrism.” And, “The fossil record continues to be uncovered, and continues to show more and more what you expect to see if common descent is true. At all of the major transitions, there are intermediates found in just the right places.” Read More ›